A report released today by a Harvard University student, and published in
the online edition of The American Journal of Public Health, purports to
show that virginity pledges are ineffective.

This major hit at abstinence
pledges contains several problems: The data is a decade old,

there are no
data comparisons,

and the report relies on self-responses of adolescents.

Clearly, the left is at it again

http://eatmoreshitandkilljyoung



Another Hit at Abstinence

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/10636/BLI/dotcommentary/index.htm



Another Hit at Abstinence








A report released today by a Harvard University student, and published in
the online edition of The American Journal of Public Health, purports to
show that virginity pledges are ineffective. This major hit at abstinence
pledges contains several problems: The data is a decade old, there are no
data comparisons, and the report relies on self-responses of adolescents.
Clearly, the left is at it again -- taking or manufacturing any possible
"evidence" in order to slam abstinence programs.

Plainly put, it is a matter of survival for the left because the network of
consultants and experts for comprehensive sex education subsists on
government contracts. And, we are talking about big money. For example, in
2002, abstinence programs received only $102 million in federal funding
compared to at least $427 million allocated to comprehensive sex education
and contraception programs. Last year, when the president proposed
increasing funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs, more than 200
left-wing groups lobbied Capitol Hill to oppose the increase.


While the left claims that abstinence education is "too simplistic" and
"just say no" doesn't work, the programs have been very effective in
providing teens the skills and character development that they need to
handle situations and to say "no" effectively. In addition, such programs
provide opportunities for teens to learn that others who have engaged in
early sexual activity regret their choice -- nearly two-thirds (63 percent)
state that they wish they had waited to have sex.


It is incomprehensible that leaders of organizations that work with teens
would oppose abstinence. It is even more incomprehensible that anyone
working in public health would oppose programs that discourage promiscuity
when the sexually transmitted disease rates are out-of-control and affect,
primarily, those under age 25. The increase in abstinence programs has been
effective in reversing trends that some believed were irreversible. It is
clear from various analyses of official data by researchers for the Beverly
LaHaye Institute that abstinence education is behind the current decreases
in teen pregnancy and teen abortion.


The reversal of long-standing trends is even more surprising given the
contrast in funding for abstinence programs as compared with comprehensive
sex education programs. While the left claims that comprehensive sex
education includes strong abstinence messages, usually there is only token
coverage of half-a-page or less material. Instead, there is plenty of
contradiction and lots of offensive material -- sometimes in the teacher's
manuals or supplemental literature rather than in the notebooks that the
students take home. Many parents find it hard to support school-based
comprehensive sex education. The materials recommend substituting
masturbation for intercourse, and discuss oral and anal sex as well as
homosexuality without even neutral information about risk factors, much less
value judgments. One could reasonably assume that such behaviors are
mainstream and part of the "normal" lifestyle of teenagers.


Numerous studies document the risk of teen sexual activity. In addition to
the emotional and psychological damage, subsequent marital problems and
inherent impact on the ability to bond with the opposite sex, there are
risks in terms of drugs, alcohol and a wide variety of health problems. The
most serious health problems, of course, are sexually transmitted diseases,
which have tripled in the past six years -- 15 million new cases occur each
year and involve 3 million teenagers. The types and deadliness of the STDs
is also increasing, even though advertisements for treatment imply that STDs
are no big deal. While the left argues that these diseases are "medically
under control," there is a huge difference between "treatable" and
"curable."


Even the liberal Guttmacher Institute (think tank for Planned Parenthood)
admits that more than half of the pregnancies in the United States occur to
women using some sort of contraception. The condom, for instance, has a
15-percent failure rate; yet it is routinely depicted as providing "safe"
sex. Among teens, at least 74 percent of pregnancies are unintended -- more
than 800,000 teen pregnancies every year. These teens are unlikely to finish
school and are more likely to be poor. The children born to teen parents are
more likely to have complications that accompany low birth rate and to
experience poverty, as well as academic and behavior problems. In addition,
teens engaging in sexual activity are more likely to be depressed and to
attempt suicide.


Further, the financial cost of unwed teen pregnancy is approximately $30
billion. With abstinence programs reversing teen pregnancies, one would
think that financial considerations alone would mandate support for
abstinence. Yet, the left continues to push comprehensive sex education and
to find ways to undermine abstinence-until-marriage efforts. Publication of
the faulty Harvard study is just another example.


Sadly, the nation's teens are victims of the left's agenda; Concerned Women
for America (CWA) cannot support any effort that would reverse the wonderful
progress that has been made in recent years to empower teens to say "no" and
to reverse trends that experts thought were irreversible. CWA will continue
to provide truth to counter the distortions that continue to mislead the
nation's youth.










--
----------

J Young

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/10636/BLI/dotcommentary/index.htm

Another Hit at Abstinence

A report released today by a Harvard University student, and published in
the online edition of The American Journal of Public Health, purports to
show that virginity pledges are ineffective. This major hit at abstinence
pledges contains several problems: The data is a decade old,

there are no data comparisons,

and the report relies on self-responses of adolescents.

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/10636/BLI/dotcommentary/index.htm
Plainly put, it is a matter of survival for the left because the network of
consultants and experts for comprehensive sex education subsists on
government contracts. And, we are talking about big money. For example, in
2002, abstinence programs received only $102 million in federal funding
compared to at least $427 million allocated to comprehensive sex education
and contraception programs. Last year, when the president proposed
increasing funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs, more than 200
left-wing groups lobbied Capitol Hill to oppose the increase.

While the left claims that abstinence education is "too simplistic" and
"just say no" doesn't work, the programs have been very effective in
providing teens the skills and character development that they need to
handle situations and to say "no" effectively. In addition, such programs
provide opportunities for teens to learn that others who have engaged in
early sexual activity regret their choice -- nearly two-thirds (63 percent)
state that they wish they had waited to have sex.


It is incomprehensible that leaders of organizations that work with teens
would oppose abstinence. It is even more incomprehensible that anyone
working in public health would oppose programs that discourage promiscuity
when the sexually transmitted disease rates are out-of-control and affect,
primarily, those under age 25. The increase in abstinence programs has been
effective in reversing trends that some believed were irreversible. It is
clear from various analyses of official data by researchers for the Beverly
LaHaye Institute that abstinence education is behind the current decreases
in teen pregnancy and teen abortion.


The reversal of long-standing trends is even more surprising given the
contrast in funding for abstinence programs as compared with comprehensive
sex education programs. While the left claims that comprehensive sex
education includes strong abstinence messages, usually there is only token
coverage of half-a-page or less material. Instead, there is plenty of
contradiction and lots of offensive material -- sometimes in the teacher's
manuals or supplemental literature rather than in the notebooks that the
students take home. Many parents find it hard to support school-based
comprehensive sex education. The materials recommend substituting
masturbation for intercourse, and discuss oral and anal sex as well as
homosexuality without even neutral information about risk factors, much less
value judgments. One could reasonably assume that such behaviors are
mainstream and part of the "normal" lifestyle of teenagers.


Numerous studies document the risk of teen sexual activity. In addition to
the emotional and psychological damage, subsequent marital problems and
inherent impact on the ability to bond with the opposite sex, there are
risks in terms of drugs, alcohol and a wide variety of health problems. The
most serious health problems, of course, are sexually transmitted diseases,
which have tripled in the past six years -- 15 million new cases occur each
year and involve 3 million teenagers. The types and deadliness of the STDs
is also increasing, even though advertisements for treatment imply that STDs
are no big deal. While the left argues that these diseases are "medically
under control," there is a huge difference between "treatable" and
"curable."


Even the liberal Guttmacher Institute (think tank for Planned Parenthood)
admits that more than half of the pregnancies in the United States occur to
women using some sort of contraception. The condom, for instance, has a
15-percent failure rate; yet it is routinely depicted as providing "safe"
sex. Among teens, at least 74 percent of pregnancies are unintended -- more
than 800,000 teen pregnancies every year. These teens are unlikely to finish
school and are more likely to be poor. The children born to teen parents are
more likely to have complications that accompany low birth rate and to
experience poverty, as well as academic and behavior problems. In addition,
teens engaging in sexual activity are more likely to be depressed and to
attempt suicide.


Further, the financial cost of unwed teen pregnancy is approximately $30
billion. With abstinence programs reversing teen pregnancies, one would
think that financial considerations alone would mandate support for
abstinence. Yet, the left continues to push comprehensive sex education and
to find ways to undermine abstinence-until-marriage efforts. Publication of
the faulty Harvard study is just another example.


Sadly, the nation's teens are victims of the left's agenda; Concerned Women
for America (CWA) cannot support any effort that would reverse the wonderful
progress that has been made in recent years to empower teens to say "no" and
to reverse trends that experts thought were irreversible. CWA will continue
to provide truth to counter the distortions that continue to mislead the
nation's youth.










--
----------

J Young

Another Hit at Abstinence

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/10636/BLI/dotcommentary/index.htm

A report released today by a Harvard University student, and published in
the online edition of The American Journal of Public Health, purports to
show that virginity pledges are ineffective. This major hit at abstinence
pledges contains several problems: The data is a decade old, there are no
data comparisons, and the report relies on self-responses of adolescents.
Clearly, the left is at it again -- taking or manufacturing any possible
"evidence" in order to slam abstinence programs.